Ars Technica: "I love instant messaging. I use it both for work—we use instant messaging extensively at the Orbiting HQ—and for play, talking to my girlfriend, my family, and random people around the world. For most IM protocols, I use Digsby, but for Windows Live Messenger I've always tended to stick with the official client. I depend on many of Windows Live Messenger's built-in features—photo sharing, multiple-location sign-in, and webcam support—that I just don't get with third-party clients.
I also use social networks, including Facebook, Flickr, and Twitter. So, I was looking forward to the new version of Windows Live Messenger. An update to the client I use all the time, designed to integrate better both with Windows 7 and the social networks I use all day sounds great. What could possible go wrong?"
KP: If you’re like me and were a teenager in the early 2000s or even late 90s, you would have most likely used MSN Messenger (Windows Live Messenger) at some point in your life. Before apps like SnapChat, WhatsApp, iMessage, and Skype, MSN Messenger was the way we kept in contact with our friends. ICQ was out the door, and people were now asking what your MSN address was.
Msn messenger and yahoo messenger were the only two IM software I was using in the early 2000s
I wholeheartedly miss MSN. Skype isn't that great as an IM. MSN had is own charm and memories.
I remember so much from this article it's a good trip down memory lane.
I remember people getting really peed off when they moved the display picture from one side to the other it was like a huge deal then nothing lol.
I used to be on a Zelda MSN group and we used to talk via MSN all the time. I think that was about ten or twelve years ago. Time flies.
Gnoted: If you are upset with being forced to use the new Skype messenger, and want to downgrade to Windows Live Messenger, instead, you can do that in 2 minutes by reading this quick tutorial.
That makes no difference. They can still see you when you're online, and you can still see them and chat with them as usually. No difference there at all.
Just a usability preference that many people seem to have.
Eventually, they will all have to transition to Skype anyway. WLM will be officially dead MArch next year.
So, why postpone the inevitable?
I just don't see the point trying to stay in the past. Change in inevitable these days. We aren't static anymore like in the past. It's not like Skype is even that bad.
This is something my old uncle will love.
I've noticed that only the older people have problems with these transitions to new and different software, and would love it if they could stay on the same version for as long as possible.
The only down side of skype is that you can't check your e-mail like you could with messenger.
PC Mag-Microsoft today announced that its upgrade from Windows Live Messenger to Skype on Windows desktops will begin April 8 and take several weeks to complete.
